Intestinal anastomosis in urology

Comparing techniques

Abstract

Three different intestinal anastomosis were compared during reconstructive urologic surgery. We evaluated time, cost and incidence of complications. From November 1993 to February 1997, 45 patients (43 males and 2 females) underwent ileal resection to fashion 30 ileal neobladders, 8 ileal conduits, and 7 augmentation ileocystoplasties. The patients were randomized to 3 groups; in the first, intestinal continuity was performed by B.A.R.; the second was treated by the GIA stapling device; the last underwent manual suture with double layer interrupted stiches (vicryl). The mean follow-up was 18 months. The mean time of canalization was 6.3 days. Complications were: one intestinal subocclusion (group 1); one abdominal wound infection (group 2); one anastomotic leak and one pulmonary embolism (group 3): The mean time of anastomosis was 18, 12 and 39 minutes respectively. The average total cost was 915.000 lt. lire in group 1; 1.280.000 lt. lire in group 2; 632.000 lt. lire in group 3. We believe that mechanical devices (B.A.R. and GIA stapler) are more convenient and can be recommended for reconstructive urological surgery, because of their quickness, effectiveness and final total cost.

abstract = "Three different intestinal anastomosis were compared during reconstructive urologic surgery. We evaluated time, cost and incidence of complications. From November 1993 to February 1997, 45 patients (43 males and 2 females) underwent ileal resection to fashion 30 ileal neobladders, 8 ileal conduits, and 7 augmentation ileocystoplasties. The patients were randomized to 3 groups; in the first, intestinal continuity was performed by B.A.R.; the second was treated by the GIA stapling device; the last underwent manual suture with double layer interrupted stiches (vicryl). The mean follow-up was 18 months. The mean time of canalization was 6.3 days. Complications were: one intestinal subocclusion (group 1); one abdominal wound infection (group 2); one anastomotic leak and one pulmonary embolism (group 3): The mean time of anastomosis was 18, 12 and 39 minutes respectively. The average total cost was 915.000 lt. lire in group 1; 1.280.000 lt. lire in group 2; 632.000 lt. lire in group 3. We believe that mechanical devices (B.A.R. and GIA stapler) are more convenient and can be recommended for reconstructive urological surgery, because of their quickness, effectiveness and final total cost.",

N2 - Three different intestinal anastomosis were compared during reconstructive urologic surgery. We evaluated time, cost and incidence of complications. From November 1993 to February 1997, 45 patients (43 males and 2 females) underwent ileal resection to fashion 30 ileal neobladders, 8 ileal conduits, and 7 augmentation ileocystoplasties. The patients were randomized to 3 groups; in the first, intestinal continuity was performed by B.A.R.; the second was treated by the GIA stapling device; the last underwent manual suture with double layer interrupted stiches (vicryl). The mean follow-up was 18 months. The mean time of canalization was 6.3 days. Complications were: one intestinal subocclusion (group 1); one abdominal wound infection (group 2); one anastomotic leak and one pulmonary embolism (group 3): The mean time of anastomosis was 18, 12 and 39 minutes respectively. The average total cost was 915.000 lt. lire in group 1; 1.280.000 lt. lire in group 2; 632.000 lt. lire in group 3. We believe that mechanical devices (B.A.R. and GIA stapler) are more convenient and can be recommended for reconstructive urological surgery, because of their quickness, effectiveness and final total cost.

AB - Three different intestinal anastomosis were compared during reconstructive urologic surgery. We evaluated time, cost and incidence of complications. From November 1993 to February 1997, 45 patients (43 males and 2 females) underwent ileal resection to fashion 30 ileal neobladders, 8 ileal conduits, and 7 augmentation ileocystoplasties. The patients were randomized to 3 groups; in the first, intestinal continuity was performed by B.A.R.; the second was treated by the GIA stapling device; the last underwent manual suture with double layer interrupted stiches (vicryl). The mean follow-up was 18 months. The mean time of canalization was 6.3 days. Complications were: one intestinal subocclusion (group 1); one abdominal wound infection (group 2); one anastomotic leak and one pulmonary embolism (group 3): The mean time of anastomosis was 18, 12 and 39 minutes respectively. The average total cost was 915.000 lt. lire in group 1; 1.280.000 lt. lire in group 2; 632.000 lt. lire in group 3. We believe that mechanical devices (B.A.R. and GIA stapler) are more convenient and can be recommended for reconstructive urological surgery, because of their quickness, effectiveness and final total cost.